De La Salle University

A Research Paper with the Topic

Bontoc Igorot Ancestral Land

Submitted to

Dr. Lars Raymund Ubaldo

In Partial Fulfillment

Of the Requirements

For the Subject

SPECHIS

Submitted by

Alyssa Coleen F. Estera

Janine Angela G. Martinez

On

April 20, 2015

INTRODUCTION

The Indigenous People represent nearly 14% of the country’s population. They

are among the poorest and the most disadvantaged social group in the country. Illiteracy,

unemployment and incidence of poverty are much higher among them than the rest of the

population. Indigenous People settlements are remote, without access to basic services

and are characterized by a high incidence of morbidity, mortality and malnutrition.

There are 110 major Indigenous groups in the Philippines. Most of the Indigenous

peoples depend on traditional swidden agricultures utilizing available upland areas.

However, most indigenous communities do not have legal recognition over their

traditional lands, thus limiting their ability to freely conduct their livelihood activities are

denied access to other natural resources in their communities.

The Igorot ethnolinguistic group are composed of different Igorot people from the

different provinces of the Cordillera: Abra, Apayao, Benguet, Kalinga, Ifugao, Nueva

Vizcaya and Mountain Province. In the different province are also subgroups of the

Igorot ethnolinguistic group. For the Mountain Province, among the subgroup would be

the Bontoc Igorot, a very distinguish kind of Igorot people located on the banks of the

Chino River and the center of the Mountain Province. The Bontoc Igorot value very

much their property especially their lands where they cultivate their rice.1

1
Kate Chollipas Botengan, Bontoc Life-Ways: A Study in Education and Culture, (Manila: Centro
Escolar University Research and Development Center, 1976); William Henry Scott, The Discovery of the
 These ancestral lands of the Bontoc Igorot saw centuries of occupations, from the

Spanish Colonial Period to the American Occupation. Under the Spanish Colonial Period

saw the difficulty in fully occupying the Cordillera, including the Bontoc land. Though it

is said that during the Spanish Colonial Period, there is a doctrine that declares that the

whole Philippine archipelago belongs to the Spanish crown, the Spanish was not able to

reach the Cordillera and so making ancestral lands purely for the different ethnolinguistic

groups residing in it. In the American Occupation saw the exploitation of the Americans

to the lands and natural resources of the Philippines. The Bontoc ancestral land, as many

other ancestral lands of the different ethnolinguistic groups, would be under the

impositions of the different American land laws.2

In current day Philippines, the topics of ancestral lands would be an issue over

who technically owns these lands by the different ethnolinguistic group, especially for

this, the Bontoc Igorot ancestral lands. This research aims to discuss the situation of the

ancestral lands of the Igorot Ethnolinguistic group from prehistory, Spanish and

American period, postcolonial period, to the contemporary period. This research will

look in to the establishment of the ancestral lands during the pre-colonial period, its

survival during the Spanish colonial era, its discovery and exploitation to foreign colonial

power during the American period, and most especially the state of these lands after the

colonial period up to the present day.

Igorots, (Quezon City: New Day Publishers, 1974); Carmencita Cawed, The Culture of the Bontoc Igorot,
(Manila: MCS Enterprises, Incorporated, 1972).
2
Scott, The Discovery of the Igorots, 41-73.
Ancestral Land (Historical Background)

Mountain Province originally was composed of five sub provinces including

Bontoc, Ifugao, Benguet, Apayao and Kalinga. Bontoc being a first class municipality

before Mountain Province being divided was the capital city of the Mountain Province.3

(see Map 1 for map of Cordillera and Map 2 for the map of Cordillera’s ethnolinguistic

groups) In 1966, the Mountain Province was divided into four new provinces: Kalinga-

Apayao, Ifugao, Benguet, and Mountain Province which was mereley the Bontoc

province. Bontoc land, usually mountains and hills, consists of agricultural areas,

forrested areas, water bodies and residential areas.

3
“Bontoc Municpal Profile,” ccessed on April 15, 2015 at
http://mountainprovince.net/tourism/?page_id=38
 Figure 1 Map of Cordillera

Figure 2 Map of Cordillera's Ethnolinguistic Groups

Land for the Bontoc Igorot is considered to be valuable propert of the people.

With no concept of landlords and tenant for the Bontoc people, ownership of lands would

be defaulted to those different Bontoc Igorot who cultivate the land. For the Bontoc

people, if a person is the one cultivating a cetrtain piece of terrace then initially the land

would belong to that person and that perosn is the primary owner of that said land, but it

would only cover the part of land that the person is cultivating. Part of valuable propert
for the Bontoc people are the lands and fields where they cultivate rice, their houses, and

granaries, and other material properties like head beads and jars.4

The concept of public properties that are shared by the Bontoc community exist

for the Bontoc people. Public lands like these are called Tayan and these would usually

be mountains, hills and agricultural lands of Bontoc. This public land would usually be

owned by a clan with several related families. Though it may be considered as public

property within the Bontoc people, a person from the clan may single out and claim the

property as his own land by producing a large pig that amounts to about three or four

hundred pesos to his family. He bring this offering to the ato and it will be feasted by

elders of the clan who gathers and will decide if they would give the public property to

that person.The private ownership would first be investigated by the co-owners of the

public land and the agreement will be sealed in a form of a feast. When the elders of the

Bontoc community decided to give the land to the person they would present him the

property with a saying:5

Nay fuwasan mi na
ya sik-a ay fumangon mi isna
ay uschongan yo na

(Now we bind this contract here

you from whom we have come from
witness this deed)

4
Carmencita, Cawed, The Culture of the Bontoc Igorot, (Manila: MCS, Enterprises, Incorporated,
1972), 40-41.
5
Ibid, 40-55.
 For the Bontoc people, when it comes to inheritance of the land properties of a

Bontoc family, the eldest child would inherit the largest part of land and whatever is left

for the youngest then that is what he would just acquire. If ever the family would have no

children, the piece of land property would be given to the relative of the dead spouse who

would be the one to offer a pig to the family upon the burial practice. The land would not

be given to the remaining spouse. Properties are inherited by the Bontoc children and

upon the marriage of the two Bontoc couple who have two separate inherited land, these

land properties would combine to the couple. The married couple would work throughout

the years in order to aquire more land.6

The use of the lands of for the Bontoc people would mostly be for cultivating rice

and residential. Agriculutral land in Bontoc would be the 2nd biggest piece of lands in the

Bontoc land, next to forrest area. Agricultural land woul covers an area as much as an

area of 13,426.38 for corn, highland vegetables, lowland fruit trees, bananas, rice and

inland fishing areas.7

Spanish and American Colonial Period

Many Filipinos suffered during the colonial rule of the Spanish and American

empires. Under Spanish rule, many of the indigenous people were able to avoid contact

6
Ibid, 40-41.
7
“Bontoc Municpal Profile,” accessed on April 15, 2015 at
http://mountainprovince.net/tourism/?page_id=38.
and attempts of assimilation by retreating to inaccessible mountain areas, particularly on

the island of Mindanao and in the Cordillera region. However, this radically changed

under American president William McKinley who announced a policy of “benevolent

assimilation” for the native Filipinos in 1898.8 AS part of this campaign, English was

imposed as the official language in the Philippines. Today, the Philippines are the 4th

biggest nation of English speakers in the world.

The Spanish had implemented the Regalian doctrine in the Philippines as well as

in many other colonies.9 This concept dates back to the days of the Spanish monarchy

that still underpins the Philippines’ legal system of land ownership that declares that the

state owns all natural resources. As Article 12, Section 2 of the 1987 Philippine

Constitution says:

All lands of the public domain, waters, mineral, coal,

petroleum and other mineral oils, all forces of potential
energy, fisheries, forests or timber, wildlife, flora and
fauna, and other natural resources are owned by the
state.10

Under this system of land ownership, lands are generally classified as private or

public. Private lands are lands that have been segregated from the general mass of the

8
June Prill-Brett, “Indigenous Land Rights and Legal Pluralism among Philippine Highlanders”,
Law and Society Review. Volume 28, No. 3. Law and Society in Southeast Asia (1994) Accessed on April
10, 2015 at http://www.jstor.org/stable/3054089. 693.
9
Prill-Brett, “Indigenous Land Rights and Legal Pluralism among Philippine Highlanders”, 693.
10
June Prill-Brett, “Contested Domains: The Indegenous People’s Rights Act (IPRA) and Legal
Pluralism in the Northern Philippines” Leiden, The Netherlands (1994). 43.
public domain by any form of grant by the state.11 Meanwhile, public lands refer to all

lands that are not acquired by private persons or corporations and are generally classified

as agricultural or non-agricultural lands.12 Only lands classified as agricultural may be

declares as “disposable” and eligible for private ownership.

With the establishment of the Regalian doctrine, one can argue that most

indigenous people are informal settlers on public lands since any land not covered by

official documentation is considered part of the public domain and owned by the state,

regardless of how long the lands have been continuously occupied. The occupants may

be evicted should the government have a need for the land. This negates the viewpoint of

the indigenous peoples that villagers have prior rights to territory they have traditionally

occupied and exploited from generation to generation.13

However, during the American Colonial rule, the US retained that policy and

enforced it through various land acts. These laws proved to be particularly devastating for

the Indigenous peoples as it was contradictory to their customary practice of shared

revenue. The concept of distinguishable private property had not existed in their

communities. This made it easy for the American occupiers to declare all the lands

inhabited by Indigenous peoples as property of the state. They implemented the Torrens

11
Prill-Brett, “Contested Domains: The Indegenous People’s Rights Act (IPRA) and Legal
Pluralism in the Northern Philippines”, 43.
12
Ibid., 43.
13
June Prill Brett, “Landholdings and Indigenous Corporate Groups Among the Bontok of
Mountain Province, Philippines”, (Ph.D. Thesis, University of the Philippines, 1987), 56.
system of registration, placing the obligation for providing ownership on the landholder,

was extended to the Philippines.14 The US government were ignorant of the native land-

tenure systems. They considered lands that are not covered by land registration or paper

titles to be public lands. Although, during that time, it was encouraged among indigenous

people to register their lands. However, the Indigenous people though of it as an absurd

idea, because then, they would have to pay taxes on lands that they already owned.

Detailed Definition of Ancestral Land

The Republic Act No. 8371 or also known as the “Indigenous Peoples’ Rights Act

(IPRA) of 1997,” states the all areas that belongs to an ethnolinguistic groups or

“indigenous cultural communities (ICC)” or “indigenous people (IP)” are all ancestral

domains for that ethnolinguistic groups/ICC/IP which is subjected to the Act. These

ancestral domains compromise of lands, inland waters, coastal areas, and natural

resources that are occupied or possessed by the ethnolinguistic group since time

immemorial which means that these lands are said to be ancestral domains if they have

occupied that land even before the IPRA was formed. These lands would considered void

if the lands were claimed during/through “war, force majeure or displacement by force,

deceit, stealth, or as a consequence of government projects or any voluntary dealings

14
Ibid., 691.
entered into by the government and private individuals/ corporations” The IPRA also

defines “ancestral lands” as15:

land, subject to property rights within the ancestral domains

already existing and/or vested upon affectivity of the Act,
occupied, possessed and utilized by individuals, families and
clans who are members of the ICCs/ IPs since time immemorial,
by themselves or through their predecessors-in-interest, under
claims of individual or traditional group ownership,
continuously, to the present except when interrupted by war,
force majeure or displacement by force, deceit, stealth, or as a
consequence of government projects and other voluntary
dealings entered into by government and private
individuals/corporations, including, but not limited to,
residential lots, rice terraces or paddies, private forests, swidden
farms and tree lots.

Northern Luzon is made up of four distinct types of land area16:

1. Coastal plain are plain that are located in costal areas. These plains are usually

consistently narrow strip of land. This type of land areas are usually the dwelling

area of the Christian Ilokano that resides in La Union, Ilocos Norte and Ilocos

Sur provinces.

2. Coastal hill areas are an extension of the coastal plain area that are connected

irregularly with the mountains. These areas are not as much present at the eastern

part of Northern Luzon and more on the western part.

3. Mountain countries are the mountainous areas of Northern Luzon, mostly at the

center of Northern Luzon, or otherwise known as the Cordillera area. Mountain

15
Philippines, “The Indigenous Peoples’ Rights Act of 1997” National Commission on Indigenous
Peoples, Rule II, sec. 1, 2.
16
Albert Ernest Jenks, The Bontoc Igorot, (Manila: Ethnological Survey Publications, 1905), 24-
26.
 Province is mostly mountain countries and also those provinces around the

Mountain Province such as Kalinga, Apayao, Benguet, and Ifugao.

4. Level areas are areas that lie mainly along the river courses. These areas are

usually besides river valleys and mountainous areas. There are many level areas

in the center part of Northern Luzon and within the provinces of Mountain

Province, an example of this would probably the some part of Kalinga which

would be located near the Chico River and between mountainous areas of

Kalinga.

The Bontoc Land would consist of both mountain countries and level areas.

Bontoc is the capital town of Mountain Province with a total land area of approximately

39,610 hectares with coordinates at 17-25 degrees latitude and 120-18 degrees longitude.

Bontoc is located at the heart of the Mountain Province (see Map 2 for the Map of

Bontoc, Mountain Province) where its northern neighbor would be the municipality of

Tubo, Abra; northeast neighbor would be Sagada, Mountain Province and Tinglayan,

Kalinga; to the east of Bontoc would be the municipality of Barlig; on the south would be

Banaue and Hungduan, Ifugao; southwest would be Sabangan, Mountain Province; and

on the west of Bontoc would be Sagada and Besao17.

17
“Bontoc Municpal Profile,” accessed on April 15, 2015 at
http://mountainprovince.net/tourism/?page_id=38; “Municpality of Bontoc (Capital), Mountain Province,”
accessed on April 16, 2015 at http://www.dilgcar.com/index.php/lgu/car-profile/mt-province/bontoc-
capital.
 The 39,610 hectares of Bontoc lands consists of 23.04% agricultural lands,

15.80% grassland/shrublang/open lands, 53.31% wooden area, and 7.85% water bodies

and other built-up areas. According to the Bontoc Municipal Profile, Bontoc Land

consists mainly of agricultural land, forested areas, and water bodies. In terms of land

classification 2,498 hectares of the Bontoc land are classified to be alienable and

disposable and 37,112 are forestlands. Table 1 shows the distribution of the Bontoc land

and the measurement (in hectares) these distributions occupy. 18

Existing Categories Land Areas (Has) % to Total

1. Built up
939.03 2.37
Area/Infrastructure

2. Agricultural Area 13,426.38 33.90

3. Forest Area 25,064.17 63.28

4. Water Bodies 180 .45

Total 39,610 100

(Table 1)
Source: SAFDZ, Department of Agriculture, Bontoc, Mountain Province at
http://mountainprovince.net/tourism/?page_id=38

Agricultural Areas, as specified from the table, occupies 13,426.38 hectares of

18
“Bontoc Municpal Profile,” accessed on April 15, 2015 at
http://mountainprovince.net/tourism/?page_id=38.
Bontoc land for corn, highland vegetables, lowland fruit trees, bananas, rice and inland

fishing areas. Rice terraces are evident in the agricultural area of the Bontoc Land. The

forest areas of the Bontoc land have a total area of 25,064 .17 hectares, which is the

largest part of the Bontoc land. These forest areas does not entirely mean that it is

uninhabited. Water bodies covers a total of 180 hectares including lakes and wetland,

fishing grounds, and major rivers and creeks.

Bontoc, Mountain Province consists of 16 barangays namely: Alab Oriente, Alab

Proper, Balili, Bayyo, Bontoc Ili, Caluttit, Can-eo, Dalican, Gonogon, Guina-ang, Mainit,

Maligcong, Poblacion, Samoki, Talubin, and Tocucan. Table 2 below shows the hectares

occupied by each barangays from above and below 1000 hectares slope areas while Map

3 shows the location of these barangays in Bontoc and hence the whole ancestral land

area of Bontoc19:

19
“Bontoc Municpal Profile,” accessed on April 15, 2015 at
http://mountainprovince.net/tourism/?page_id=38
 Physiographic Grouping (hectares)

Barangay Below 1000 Above 1000 Total

1. Alab Oriente 318 129 447

2. Alab Proper 102 211 313

3. Balili 246 359 605

4. Bayyo 5,787 5,787

5. Bontoc Ili 385 2,084 2,469

6. Caluttit 19 35 54

7. Can-eo 197 2,294 2,491

8. Dalican 955 955

9. Gonogon 102 666 768

10. Guina-ang 98 1,762 1,860

11. Mainit 3,480 3,930

12. Maligcong 1,500 1,500

13. Poblacion 61 61

14. Samoki 702 875 1,577

15. Talubin 222 5,466 5,688

16. Tocucan 2,940 8,165 11,105

Average/Total 5,391 33,769 39,610

(Table 2)
Source: Plan metric measurement of Bontoc Elevation Map; NAMRA 1996.
Figure 3 Map of Bontoc and its Barangays
Claimants of Land

In recent years, the Philippine Government has made major policy reforms in

order to address the serious problem of the lack of tenurial security among Indigenous

peoples and local communities. The Philippines has led the way in Southeast Asia region

as it had pioneered the use of long-term stewardship agreements as a tenurial instrument

to recognize the resource management rights of Indigenous peoples within forestlands in

the early 1980s’.

But perhaps, the most radical policy reform in the region was the enactment of te

Indigenous People Rights Act (IPRA) by the Philippine Government in 1997. It was

modeled on the UN Declaration on the rights of Indigenous peoples, IPRA was

considered was considered a progressives and exemplary law at the time of its

conception.20 The IPRA goes beyond the contact-based resource management agreements

between the state and the community as it recognizes “ownership” of the Indigenous

community over their traditional territories, which include land, bodies of water, and all

other natural resources therein. When the law was passed, many Indigenous Filipinos,

such as their customary law, principles of community and religion, were addressed. By

now, 18 years later, perception has drastically changed. The central issue, as well as the

main focus of critique, revolves around the recognition of ancestral domains.

20
Philippines, “The Indigenous Peoples’ Rights Act of 1997” National Commission on Indigenous
Peoples, Administrative Order No. 1 (1998), sec. 2, 1.
 Furthermore, the IPRA gave jurisdiction of all ancestral domain claims and

provided for a process of titling of lands through the issuance of Certificates of Ancestral

Domain Titles (CADT).21 If a CADT is granted, the indigenous community will not only

own the land rights to that area. It is also allowed to implement its customary law as long

as it does not conflict with the essence of the Philippine Constitution. Along with the law,

a National Commission on Indigenous Peoples (NCIP) was installed with the sole

purpose of implementing IPRA.22

The IPRA provided the basis for filing new claims, which included the

submission of a valid perimeter map, evidences and proofs, and the accomplishment of

an Ancestral Domain Sustainable Development and Protection Plan (ADSDPP). 23 All

existing ancestral domain claims previously recognized through the issuance of

Certificate of Ancestral Domain Claims (CADCs) are required to pass through a process

of affirmation for titling.24

“Validation of Certificates of Ancestral Domain Claims (CADCs) ICCs/IP

communities whose ancestral domains have been satisfactorily delineated pursuant to

DENR Special Order No. 31, Series of 1989, as amended, and Administrative Order No.

2, Series of 1993,25 may apply for the issuance of a Certificate of Ancestral Domain Title

21
Ibid., sec. 4, 5.
22
Ibid., Rule II, sec.1, 3.
23
Ibid., Rule III, sec.2, 6
24
Ibid., Rule VIII, sec.5, 43
(CADT) over the area without going through the process prescribed in the Act. Such

application shall be made through the filing of a duly accomplished application form with

the NCIP Provincial Office for the purpose.

IPRA included “Self Delineation as the guiding principle in the identification of

Ancestral Domain claims.26 However, due to the lack of resources and skills in the NCIP,

the government has not been able to provide the necessary services to the Indigenous

people sector to realize this mandate and issue the necessary titles.

The Indigenous People in the Philippines remain as the most marginalized sector

of society. This status continues despite the tremendous inroads achieved by

communities, partners and advocates through years of struggle. In 1997, as result

vigilance and sustained advocacy of the IP sector and its partners, the IPRA was enacted .

This provided venues and legal backbone for the recognition of the traditional rights of

communities over their ancestral domain.

In a nutshell, the IPRA provides for the recognition of the traditional rights of

Indigenous people over their ancestral domains through the issuance of CADT. It

recognizes the rights of ICC’s to define their development priorities through their own

ADSDPP and exercise management and utilize the natural resources within their

traditional territories.

25
Ibid., Rule VIII, sec. 2, 43
26
Ibid., Rule VIII, sec. 2, 40.
Ancestral Land Issues and Controversies

One of the most recent issues Bontoc ancestral lands, along with the provinces

around it, faces are the large-scale mining issues under the administration of President

Gloria Macapagal Arroyo. In 2009, it was reported that there would be a large-scale

mining project that would cover 526,543.7943 hectares of land in the Cordillera

provinces, which also compromise the watersheds of the Chico River (see table below on

the distribution of hectares per mining company). This mining project was a pending

project filed at the Cordillera office of the Mines and Geo-Science Bureau (MGB-CAR)

by local and foreign mining corporations. The mining project was a project of Arroyo in

order to campaign to strengthen the mining industry. It was also released by the

Malacañang, that the mining industry has resulted in $1.4 billion in investments from

2006-2009.27

According to the natives from the different provinces including Bontoc, the large-

scale mining project would destroy the ancestral homeland of the different ethnolinguistic

groups and would also destroy the Chico River, a vital part of the agricultural industry of

most of the Cordillera provinces as it serves as the watershed of the rice fields and

agricultural lands, from the Mountain Province to Kalinga and Cagayan valley. The

length of the Chico River is 174.67 kilometers long, which starts at Tinoc, Ifugao passing

through Buguias Benguet, Mountain Province then up to Cagayan.28

27
Arthur L. Allad-Iw, “Cordillera Tribes Heighten Struggle Against Large-Scale Mines in Chico
River Watersheds” accessed on April 12, 2015 at http://bulatlat.com/main/2009/06/06/cordillera-tribes-
heighten-struggle-against-large-scale-mines-in-chico-river-watersheds/
28
Ibid.
 Table 1 Distribution of Hectares per Mining Company
http://bulatlat.com/main/2009/06/06/cordillera-tribes-heighten-struggle-against-large-scale-mines-in-chico-
river-watersheds/

Arguments of natives from the areas that would affect the mining project were

that it would destroy the forests and pollute the Chico River. Natives give emphasis on

the destruction of the Chico River due to this large-scale mining project because of the

river being their source of lively hood for it is their main water supply for their rice fields

and farms. Most people from these areas primary source of living are through agriculture.

It is also been argued by the natives that the mining project cannot push through without
the consent and approval of the people from the areas affected.29 In the table below shows

the affected areas of the Chico River watershed:

Table 2 Chico Watershed Covered Municipality (Source: RDC-CAR 2008)

http://bulatlat.com/main/2009/06/06/cordillera-tribes-heighten-struggle-against-large-scale-mines-in-chico-river-
watersheds/

There are also issues recently on small-scale mining projects that were stopped by

the Regional Trial Court in Bontoc.30 Mining issues are very evident in the Mountain

Province area due to the fact that probably a large scale of ancestral land would be

affected by mining projects. Since the lands that would be affected by the mining projects

covers much of the lands inhabited by the Mountain Province ethnolinguistic groups,

they have the right to put a stop on these mining projects.

The Philippines is said to host one of the world’s biggest deposits of undiscovered

minerals, especially of gold and copper. Mineral reserves are estimated at about 7.1

billion tons of 13 known metallic and 51 billion tons of 29 nonmetallic minerals, many of

which are located in areas of rich biodiversity and within ancestral domains of indigenous

peoples. With the enactment of the Mining Act of 1995 (Republic Act 7942), the

Philippines liberalized its mining policy and opened both public and private lands,

including protected areas, to foreign investments. For 2012, the Mines and Geosciences

29
Ibid.
30
Dexter A. See, “Court stops small Mt. Province miners,” accessed on April 15, 2015 at
http://manilastandardtoday.com/2014/09/19/court-stops-small-mt-province-miners/
Bureau of the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) expects USD

2.27 billion of foreign investment in mining.

Mining in this, issue is a source of conflict that affects indigenous ancestral

domains, the protection of cultural heritage, and of natural resources. While small-

scale mining in the Philippines still provides a field for further study and analysis,

large-scale mining clearly bears the potential of disastrous effects not only on the

environment, but also on indigenous peoples’ ancestral domains. In this case,

whatever result that will be found after studying the Philippine Small Scale Mining

Act of 1991, it shall guide the province in its plans to improve the management of

small-scale mining operations also the protection of environment and the

indigenous community.

Conclusion

The concept of landlords and tenants do not exist for the Bontoc Igorot. All land,

terraces, are owned by the different Bontoc Igorot who cultivate the land. If you are the

one to cultivate this certain piece of terrace then initially the land would belong to you

and you are the primary owner of the said land. Part of the valuable property for the

Bontoc Igorot is the lands and fields where they cultivate rice, their houses, and

granaries, and other material property like head beads and jars. Public properties that are

shared by the Bontoc community exist for the Bontoc Igorots which they call Tayan.

These Tayan would usually be mountains and hills of Bontoc. By community this means

that a clan with several related families, and these clan would own these kind of
communal properties or tayan. Though it may be considered as public property within the

Bontoc tribe, a person from the clan may single out and claim the property as his own

private property by producing a large pig that amounts to about three or four hundred

pesos to his family. The private ownership would first be investigated by the co-owners

of the public land and the agreement will be sealed in a form of a feast.31

In the Spanish colonial period, due to the Regalian doctrine, it was stated that the

whole Philippine archipelago belongs to the Spanish crown. 32 Lands are generally

classified as private or public. So it means that the indigenous people have no rights with

their owned lands, as their lands are owned by the Spanish regal. However, the Spaniards

weren’t able to subjugate the Cordillera. Therefore, indigenous land rights were hardly

affected except in a few areas wherein churches were built on indigenous lands that were

either donated by locals or seized.33 It was only during the American period that several

land laws were passed to the detriment of indigenous communities. One of these is the

Land Registration Act of 1902.34 This required the acquisition of a Torrens title as proof

of land ownership. Another is the Public Land Act of 1905, which declared all

unregistered lands and those without Torrens title public lands.35 However, the flaw with

the Torrens law is that, not all indigenous people would be able to get back their lands,

because you need to apply for the titles, and many of them weren’t able to apply for land

titles.

31
Cawed, The Culture of the Bontoc Igorot, 40-55
32
Prill-Brett, Indigenous Land Rights and Legal Pluralism among Philippine Highlanders, 691.
33
Scott, The Discovery of the Igorots.
34
Prill-Brett, Indigenous Land Rights and Legal Pluralism among Philippine Highlanders, 692.
35
Ibid, 691.
 There were a lot of land acts that were approved and implemented. One very

important law that was implemented was the IPR (Indigenous People’s Rights Act Under

the legal framework of IPRA, 36 indigenous communities are exercising their right to

decide over government projects operating within their territories. With the help of IPRA,

it has provided support for protecting native land titles and indigenous resource

management practices. IPRA recognizes communal ownership through through its grant

of a certificate of ancestral domain title. The law led to government policies that uphold

human rights of indigenous people. Through the IPRA, NCIP (National Commission on

Indigenous People) was created.37 NCIP mandate to issue the Certificates of Ancestral

Land Titles (CALTs) and Certificates of Domain Titles (CADTs).38 The NCIP also helps

in solving issues or disputes among tribes, and issue on ancestral lands.

36
Prill-Brett, “Contested Domains: The Indegenous People’s Rights Act (IPRA) and Legal
Pluralism in the Northern Philippines”, 16.

37 Ibid, 17
38 Ibid., 17.
BIBLIOGRAPHY

Andres, Tomas D. Understanding the Values of the Bontoc and the Bakun Igorots, Book
10. Quezon City: Giraffe Books, 2004

Balita. “Mayor Domogan hopes for positive developments in ancestral land title mess”.
Published on February 18, 2014. Accessed on January 30, 2015.
http://balita.ph/2014/02/18/mayor-domogan-hopes-for-positive-developments-in-
ancestral-land-title-mess/.

Barton, Roy Franklin. The Mythology of the Ifugaos. Philadelphia: American Folklore
Society. 1955.

Botengan, Kate Chollipas. Bontoc Life-Ways: A Study in Education and Culture. Manila:
Centro Escolar University Research and Development Center, 1976.

Bulatlat. “Igorot Leader Arrested in N. Ecija, Groups Decry Political Harassment”.

Published on April 12, 2011. Accessed on January 30, 2015.
http://bulatlat.com/main/2011/04/12/igorot-leader-arrested-in-n-ecija-groups-
decry-political-harassment/.

Cawed, Carmencita. The Culture of the Bontoc Igorot. Manila: MCS Enterprises,
Incorporated, 1972.

Cordillera Peoples Alliance. “The Wider picture of Igorot out-migration”. Accessed on

January 30, 2015. http://www.cpaphils.org/campaigns/CPA%
20paper_OutMigration.pdf.

Delos Reyes, Angelo J. and Delos Reyes, Aloma M. Igorot: A people who daily touch the
earth and the sky. Baguio CIty: Cordillera Schools Group, 1986.

Finin, Gerard A. The Making of the Igorot. Manila: Ateneo De Manila University Press,
2005.

Goda, Toh. Cordillera: diversity in culture change, social anthropology of hill peoples in
Northern Luzon, Philippines. Quezon City: New Day Pub., 2001.

Lengwa, Rommel. “Bontoc Town Officials give DAR Exec Ultimatum on Ancestral
Land Controversy.” Northern Philippine Times, September 12, 2007. Accessed on
April 10, 2015 at http://northphiltimes.blogspot.com/2007/09/bontoc-town-
officials-give-dar-exec.html.

Lynch, Owen Jr. Tribal Land Law: A Mechanism For Upland Participatory
Development. Manila: Integrated Research Center, De La Salle University,
1982.
_____________. “Ancestral Land and Cultural Survival.” CSQ 8.4 Organizing to
Survive. (Winter 1984)

Manaligod, Ruffy. Struggle against development aggression. Quezon City: Tunay na

Alyansa ng Bayan Alay sa Katutubo. 1990.

Manochon, Antonina A. INdigenous MAnagement of

Medina, Carlos R. Understanding the Ifugao Rice Terraces. Baguio City: Saint Louis
University, 2003.

Molintas, Jose Mencio. “The Philippines Indigenous Peoples’ Struggle for Land and Life:
Challenging Legal Text.”. Accessed on April 10, 2015 at
http://www.arizonajournal.org/ajicl/archive/AJICL2004/vol211/Molintas.pdf

National Statistical Coordination Board. “Nearly one-fifth of all land in Cordillera is

ancestral domain of indigenous peoples.” NSCB Fact Sheet. October Accessed on
April 10, 2015 at http://www.nscb.gov.ph/rucar/pdf/fs/FS_
ancestraldomain_Oct10.pdf

Prill-Brett, June. Bontoc Concept of Property as a Product of their Socio Economical

Systems. Cordillera Consultative Committee, Dakami Ya Nan Dagami: Papers and
Proceedings of the First Cordillera Multi-Sectoral Land Congress, 1983.

_____________. Landholdings and Indigenous Corporate Groups Among the Bontok of

Mountain Province, Philippines. Doctoral dissertation submitted to the College of
Social Sciences and Philosophy, University of the Philippines, 1987.

_____________.Common Property Regimes Among the Bontok of the Northern

Philippine Highlands and State Policies. CSC Working Paper 21. Baguio City:
Cordillera Studies Center, University of the Philippines College Baguio, 1993.

_____________.“Indigenous Land Rights and Legal Pluralism among Philippine

Highlanders”. Law and Society Review. Volume 28, No. 3. Law and Society in
Southeast Asia, 1994. Accessed on April 10, 2015 at
http://www.jstor.org/stable/3054089.

________________.“Contested Domains: The Indegenous People’s Rights Act (IPRA) and

Legal Pluralism in the Northern Philippines” Revised version of a paper presented
at the 7th International Philippine Studies Conference, June 2004, Leiden, The
Netherlands.

Rood, S. Protecting Ancestral Land Rights in the Cordillera. Peace, Conflict Resolution and
Human Rights Research Report 94-001. Quezon City: University of the Philippines
Press and the Center for Integrative and Development Studies, 1994.

Sacla, Wasing D. Compilation of Land Laws - Effect on Indigenous Ownership/Rights.

Scott, William Henry. The Discovery of the Igorots: Spanish Contacts with the Pagans
 of Northern Luzon. Quezon City: New Day Publishers, 1974.

________________.Of Igorots and Independence. Baguio City: ERA. 1993.

Tapang, B.P. Cordillera in June, Essays Celebrating June Prill-Brett, Anthropologist.

Quezon City: The University of the Philippines Press, 2007.

Tolentino, Delfin Jr. Resistance and Revolution in the Cordillera. Baguio: University of
the Philippines College Baguio, 1994.

UNFPA-NSO Project PHI/96/P01. Mt. Province in Focus: In Demographics and Socio-

Economic Profile. Makati: National Statistics Office. 1999.

________________. Ifugao in Focus In Demographics and Socio-Economic Profile.

Manila: National Statistics Office. 1999.

________________. Beguet in Focus: In Demographics and Socio-Economic Profile.

Manila: National Statistics Office. 1999.
 APPENDIX A

Article: Cordillera Tribes Heighten Struggle Against Large-Scale Mines in Chico

River Watersheds
Author: Arthur L. ALLAD-IW 

Accessed on: April 12, 2015
Source: http://bulatlat.com/main/2009/06/06/cordillera-tribes-heighten-struggle-against-
large-scale-mines-in-chico-river-watersheds/2/

BONTOC, Mountain Province – Like the anti-Chico Dam struggle in the 1980s, tribal
elders in this province, 394 kms. north of Manila, and nearby Kalinga are renewing their
cooperation, including their peace pact (bodong or pechen), in their new struggle to
defend their domain from the threat brought by pending large-scale mining applications.

Their villages being considered part of the Chico River watershed, they said that these
large-scale mining, if it pushes through, would destroy their ancestral homeland and the
Chico River which serve as the water source of their rice fields and agricultural lands,
from upstream in Mountain Province down to the rice producing areas in lower Kalinga
and Cagayan valley.

A Kalinga mingor (warrior) and anti-Chico Dam veteran, Ama Julio Longan said that
today, more than 20 years since Macliing Dulag led the anti-Chico Dam struggle, there is
again a basis for uniting various tribes to defend their homeland, this time against a new
enemy – the conduit state and corporate mining interests.

Mining Applications

This reporter learned from various elders, who were directly involved with the anti-Chico
dam struggle, that mine applications covering vast tracts of their ancestral domains are
pending at the Cordillera office of the Mines and Geo-sciences Bureau (MGB-CAR). The
applications were filed by local and foreign mining corporations.

MGB-CAR records show that the mining applications, numbering 15 all in all, cover a
total of 526,543.7943 hectares in the Cordillera provinces, which serve as the watersheds
of the Chico River. The coverage of these applications extends as well to areas outside
the said watersheds. The areas exclude Regions I (Ilocos) and II (Cagayan).

The biggest of the applications are the eight applications for financial and technical
assistance (FTAA) which cover 451,895.7943 hectares or equivalent to 85.82 percent of
the total coverage of applications in the Chico area; five exploration permit applications
(EXPA) which cover 65,657 hectares (12.46 percent); and, two applications for
production-sharing agreements which cover 8,991 hectares (1.70 percent).

The mining applications in the Chico River watershed area comprise 47.35 percent of the
region’s total mine applications, which span 1,111,995.4352 hectares as registered and
pending at the MGB-CAR office as of 2008. The region’s land area is 1,821,691.58
hectares.

Chico River Watershed Threatened

2008 data from the Cordilleras’ Regional Development Council (RDC-CAR) show that
the Chico River watersheds cover 405,670.60 hectares, or 22.27 percent of the region’s
total land area. These watersheds cover municipalities in the provinces of Benguet,
Ifugao, Mountain Province, Abra, Apayao and Kalinga.

It also shows that 53 percent or 216,554.57 hectares of the watersheds are pine, residual
and mossy or old growth forests.

These municipalities are inhabited by indigenous peoples, which government

acknowledged as “having instilled values and discipline on resource conservation and the
practice of indigenous forest management systems.”

Tribal elders interviewed from the affected municipalities said that watersheds are
actually the communal and clan managed-forests nurtured through ages by the indigenous
communities themselves.

Destruction of Water Sources

The Chico River has a length of 174.67 kilometers. Its water sources start from Tinoc,
Ifugao; Buguias, Benguet; and, Mountain Province and downstream. Its outlet is lowland
Cagayan.

RDC-CAR records show that the Chico River’s irrigated area is 29,199.79 hectares,
including the so-called rice granary areas in Rizal and Tabuk, both in Kalinga, and
Cagayan province.

Like the four World Bank-funded dam projects along the Chico, the large-scale mines
threaten their ancestral domain, local elders believe.

“Large-scale mining will destroy the forests, and pollute the Chico (River), which waters
our rice fields and farms. Our rice fields are sources of our food that sustain the villages
along the Chico River, where villagers’ primary livelihood is agriculture. It also waters
fields in Pinukpuk, Tabuk and Rizal where rice is produced for the commercial markets.
The water system will be polluted and will destroy our main source of livelihood which is
agriculture-based,” Longan said in Iloco.

Historic Anti-Dam Struggle

He predicted though that the mining issue will unite the people, through their indigenous
peace pact systems in various levels of struggles, including the taking up of arms to
defend their homeland, like what they displayed in the anti-Chico dam. He shared that
during the anti-Chico Dam struggle, many local villagers joined the New People’s Army
(NPA) when soldiers were deployed in the opposing villages.

One of them was Pedro Dungoc, Dulag’s right-hand man. He was ambushed together
with Dulag on April 24, 1980 by troops led by Lt. Leodegario Adalem, but survived. He
later joined the NPA and lost his life in the armed struggle.

Longan, who experienced military atrocities during the anti-Chico struggle, said that their
land issue is felt up to the present: “Every 24th of April after Macliing’s death is marked
in the memory of Macliing and other martyrs who died defending the Cordillera
homeland.” April 24 is now popularly known as Cordillera Day, with commemorations
sponsored by the biggest regional federation of community organizations – the Cordillera
Peoples Alliance (CPA).

Growing Opposition

Various communities in the Chico area have registered opposition to the mining
applications.

Upon learning of the applications in 2006, the amam-a (elders) and village officials in
Bontoc upland areas registered their opposition in a joint resolution. They sent this
resolution to the offices of the concerned government agencies, including the MGB-
CAR. The resolution was signed by the barangay (village) captains of Mainit, Guinaang,
Dalikan, and Maligcong and was endorsed by the mayor of Bontoc and the governor of
this province.

They urged these government agencies “not to allow registration or declaration of any
mining claims over their ancestral domains and territories.” They pointed out that there
were never consultations done by the applicants to the villagers.

“We lobbied various offices and stopped only when these offices assured us of their help
(in our opposition),” said Mariano Pinto, speaking in the Bontok language, said in an
interview. A leader of the Dalikan sub-tribe of Bontok, he showed their petition papers
thumb marked by elders of their sub-tribe.

Maps and documents show that the mining applications in the Bontoc area extend to
Sagada, Mountain Province, Abra and Kalinga. Some of the areas covered by the mining
applications fall within the Central Cordillera Forest Reserve under Proclamation No.
217.

According to Cordillera regional officials and MGB national officials, mining can be
allowed even in these watersheds if prior rights had existed before the declaration of the
areas as watersheds.

In fact, 2009 RDC-CAR documents show that mining tenements within the watershed
cover a total of 1,109,516.1686 hectares or 60.91 percent of the Cordilleras’ 1,821,691.58
hectares.

No Permit Without People’s Consent

In 2006, in his answer to the opposition from the barangays in Bontoc, then MGB-CAR
Dir. Neoman Dela Cruz said they will not grant any permit to the applicants until the
villagers issue their consent as required by the Mining Act of 1995. The same answer was
relayed to the people by the regional office of the National Commission on Indigenous
Peoples (NCIP).

But these government officials’ reactions were due to the strong people’s lobbying, Pinto
pointed out.

The company cannot push through with the project if the people oppose it, a
representative of a mining applicant agreed in an interview. When asked if their company
can assure the people that their project would cause no environmental destruction, he was
not able to answer the question.

Requesting that his identity be withheld, he instead claimed that they will follow what is
mandated by laws on environmental conservation.

Revitalization of the Mining Industry

Mining in the region is part of President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo’s campaign to

revitalize the mining industry, according to Cordillera regional agencies. Earlier last year,
Malacañang officials said that the mining industry generated $1.4 billion in investments
in the last three years.

But the supposed development to be brought by mining is being questioned by elders and
local officials. Sagada Sangguniang Bayan (Municipal Council) member Jaime Dugao
said that the “development” brought by mining is lopsided in favor of corporate interests.
Even the employment promises, Dugao said, will not assure accommodation of the locals
who mostly lack technical skills needed for large-scale mining.

“We might be giving away our resources in exchange for these mining companies’ small
tax payments. But the life support systems provided by our forests, our rivers and our
sustainable environs could not be paid for by any amount of money,” added Dugao, who
also chair an elders’ group in this province.

He added: “We are not against development. But the experience of our brothers in
Benguet is an eye-opener for us. Large-scale mining has been destroying their
environment since the third quarter of the 19th century since corporate mining supplanted
their traditional copper mining sites in Mankayan and denuded the forests of northern
Benguet for mine timber and smelter fuel.”

Addressing a recent Catholic Bishops Conference of the Philippines (CBCP) gathering on

mining, Dugao appealed to the bishops to support the Cordillera peoples’ struggle against
large-scale mining in the region and for the repeal of the Mining Act of 1995.

Systemic Violation of Land Rights

An elder from the Tulgao sub-tribe of Kalinga, Johnny Sawadan, explained that the
state’s declaration of their communities and lands as reservations and the acceptance of
mine applications over their domains are “institutionalized violations” of their inherent
rights to their ancestral domains.

“Our indigenous land use and utilization had been on-going prior to the establishment of
colonial governments,” said Sawadan, secretary-general of the Cordillera Elders Alliance.

“Various international laws where the Philippine government is a signatory and even the
Indigenous Peoples’ Rights Act and other laws recognize indigenous rights to their land
and environment,” he said. But they just learn of these mining projects when these are
already being processed.”

“There is no prior information dissemination to the people. Our role (as villagers) is just
to be consulted on whether we allow these domains of ours that we nurtured for
generations to be opened up,” said Sawadan, who cited such arrangements as “unfair for
the people who really care for the environment.”

He pointed out that state policies disregard their age-old indigenous system of land
ownership and are manifestations of “systemic national oppression”.

As an answer to the state policy of non-recognition of their ancestral domain rights, they
are pushing for genuine regional autonomy, Sawadan said. And he hopes that their
campaign will be elevated to a higher level, especially since this year is still a part of the
International Decade for Indigenous People declared by the United Nations.
APPENDIX B

Article: Court stops small Mt. Province miners

Author: Dexter A. See 

Accessed on: April 15, 2015
Source: http://manilastandardtoday.com/2014/09/19/court-stops-small-mt-province-
miners/

BONTOC, Mountain Province—The Regional Trial Court (RTC) Branch 35 here

ordered small-scale mining in Barangay Mainit stopped to prevent danger to human lives
and irreparable damage to the environment arising from “crude, indiscriminate,
unsupervised diggings” among other activities.
“To ensure that stoppage orders are implemented with urgency, checkpoints should be set
up to apprehend illegal transporters of ore and to apprehend and to file charges against
illegal loggers as well,” said Judge Joseph Patnaan in his resolution.
The court decision stemmed from a petition for writ of mandamus and a permanent
protection order filed by the heirs of Elizabeth G. Okoren against private small-scale
miners led by a certain Christopher Culalad.
According to the facts of the case, the Okorens own a property near five vertical shafts
set up by Culalad’s group to mine high grade gold, an allegation that the respondents
have denied.
In their complaint, the heirs of Okoren said the artisanal mining adjacent to their
ricefields would lead to the denudation of the Mainit forest due to the unabated cutting of
trees to supply the timber needed in the tunnels.
The court found that gold ores extracted from the ricefields were loaded into trucks and
transported to as far as Manila despite the absence of mining and transport permits.
Included as respondents to the civil case are the Provincial Environment and Natural
Resources Officer (PENRO) of Mountain Province, the regional technical director of the
Mines and Geosciences Bureau, Governor Leonard G. Mayaen, Police Chief Benjamin
Challoy along with the Police Regional Office and the Bureau of Internal Revenue.

Photographic evidence showed murky and polluted water in a creek, eroded mountain
sides, sacks filled with soil and rocks awaiting transport and piles of pine timber and
lumber intended for use in the mine shafts.
APPENDIX C

Article: Governor hits open pit mining in Bontoc

Author: Gwen Gaongen 

Accessed on: April 15, 2015
Source: http://bulatlat.com/main/2012/03/26/governor-hits-open-pit-mining-in-bontoc/

SAGADA, Mountain Province – Governor Leonard Mayaen says he is not in favor of the
on-going open pit mining operation in Mainit, Bontoc.
As head of provincial mining regulatory board (PMRB), the governor stressed that small-
scale mining is allowed in the province for as long as it is operated in the traditional way.
This way destruction to the environment is minimized and manageable.
He added that large financiers are not needed as traditional mining production needs are
minimal.
When we visited, the current mining activities being done in Mainit consist of an open pit
system alongside tunneling for ore sites. There are eight active mine tunnels just 100
meters above the elementary school compound and four others in an adjacent lot.
A buck hoe, considered as heavy equipment, is being used to extract “nava” above the
eight tunnels near the school compound. Villagers fear that the mining operation poses a
threat to the water source of the rice fields and “uma” (swidden farms) below the mining
site.
The governor said that aside from environmental destruction associated with open pit
mining operations, the production activities and marketing are seen as funded and
participated in by foreign nationals. The regular traffic of shipping ore out of the province
is a measure of the scale of operations, and the heavy trucks plying the Mainit to Bontoc
roads also contribute to the destruction of the standard village roads.
The governor has urged for a thorough investigation of mining operations in Mainit to aid
legislation and formulation of governance policies and plans.
In a separate incident, a truck reported to have been hired by a Bangladeshi national
Melon Hossain was apprehended and impounded for having mine tailings and nava (ore).
The driver and his helper, unable to produce Ore Transport permits, were stopped. Their
vehicle is presently impounded at the Bontoc police station.
In response to the growing small-scale mining operations in the province, the governor
has organized the small scale miners association.
Mayaen said the provincial legal team is currently studying the application of the
Philippine Small Scale Mining Act of 1991 and related laws in the province. The results
of this research shall guide the province in its plans and dispensations to improve the
management of small-scale mining operations vis a vis the protection of the environment,
and the population.
Meanwhile, the local executive said he is drafting an Executive Memorandum to set up
various check points in the province to check the illegal transport of nava and mine
tailings from the province.
As to the province’s position on large-scale mining operations, Mayaen says the
provincial government stands firm on its opposition to large-scale mining.
 The governor has recently arrived from Hongkong on the invitation of Cordillera

overseas workers organizations to speak on his province’s choice to uphold the peoples

position against large scale mini.